ENP LETTER

[conocean]

I received an email from one of the NPS rangers today. He confirmed that I will be required to hold a boating pass at all times while cruising, fishing & sightseeing in the ENP starting July 2018 regardless of my residency status on the island of Chokoloskee. He wasn't sure if the annual pass will need to be printed & kept aboard or if it will be a sticker that must be affixed to my hull. 

[jason p]

I'm thinking stickers like the guides have, I'm basing this on nothing but it would make the most sense, down my way anyway. I just tell myself it's gonna improve the park, I know I'm lying to myself but that's what I do anyway. 

[Wanaflatsfish]

9 hours ago, conocean said:

I received an email from one of the NPS rangers today. He confirmed that I will be required to hold a boating pass at all times while cruising, fishing & sightseeing in the ENP starting July 2018 regardless of my residency status on the island of Chokoloskee. He wasn't sure if the annual pass will need to be printed & kept aboard or if it will be a sticker that must be affixed to my hull. 

I would imagine that the for 2018, the rangers will be spending more time doing sticker checks than patrolling the waters....sad.....I can see the rangers set up just outside the ramps on the water doing "sticker" checks and pulling people over like a speed trap....good to see an educational program....$50 usage fee for me, no big deal...I spend more on hand select shrimp on an average trip.

 

dc

 

[NCTribute]

On 8/3/2017 at 9:37 AM, Capt. Troy said:

Not without a fight. 300% increase is BS and what are they providing a guide other than the same access they have always had.

We are just providing access to recreational park users. Funny they didn't up the other fees by 300%. Like walk in or paddle craft access.

Two ways of looking at this, guides are utilizing a public resource for profit. There is a minimum flat fee and then the total amount is based on gross receipts. The percentage is at or slightly above what a credit card fee is. Understandably the large increase from previous years is hard to swallow, but maybe the fees were too low before and are finally catching up.

I appreciate the work that fishing guides do and spend thousands of dollars on their services every year. But as our public resources become more strained each year, as usage increases, something has to be done to increase funding for upkeep and enforcement. Everyone wants lower taxes, so guess what, that means usage fees must increase to offset reduced federal/state funding. Here in NC reduced funding is putting stocking programs in jeopardy, this will likely either increase fees for fishing for specific types of fish, or worst case eliminate the programs. No one complained about the state tax rate going down, but there are consequences from that happening.

Am not saying that the increases are being shared fairly, just pointing out the reality of it. There is a lot of concern about increasing usage fees for a citizen, saying that it prevents lower income people from having access. Lots of variables in the equation for making it equitable for all.

[Capt. Troy]

6 hours ago, NCTribute said:

Two ways of looking at this, guides are utilizing a public resource for profit. There is a minimum flat fee and then the total amount is based on gross receipts. The percentage is at or slightly above what a credit card fee is. Understandably the large increase from previous years is hard to swallow, but maybe the fees were too low before and are finally catching up.

I appreciate the work that fishing guides do and spend thousands of dollars on their services every year. But as our public resources become more strained each year, as usage increases, something has to be done to increase funding for upkeep and enforcement. Everyone wants lower taxes, so guess what, that means usage fees must increase to offset reduced federal/state funding. Here in NC reduced funding is putting stocking programs in jeopardy, this will likely either increase fees for fishing for specific types of fish, or worst case eliminate the programs. No one complained about the state tax rate going down, but there are consequences from that happening.

Am not saying that the increases are being shared fairly, just pointing out the reality of it. There is a lot of concern about increasing usage fees for a citizen, saying that it prevents lower income people from having access. Lots of variables in the equation for making it equitable for all.

Those fees will be passed on to the end user. In this case the end user will be the same folks that don't and do not live around the ENP. The ones that save all year to experience the park.

If they need the money then a 300% increase should be passed along to every user. Then you have some equality.

 

No skin in this game personally. But, I have a very good understanding of what my segment brings into the state of Florida along with what other tourist based segments bring.

 

Lets put a 300% increase on water usage on Mickey Mouse and not do the same for all of the support hotels, restaurants and so on. Then, when the price of Mickey gets off the charts and people go else where lets see what happens.

 

Then again this is a National Park Issue and I can tell you the State of Florida does not support the "Federal" Ideas of their management on many levels.

[NCTribute]

Capt Troy, not really disagreeing with you, but you seem to be hung up on the 300% increase. The truth of the matter is the fees were extremely low to begin with. Also, the fees are a tax deductible business expense for a guide, the fees for the public are not. As you say the fees will simply be passed on to the customers, so what are you all worked up about?

Any increase is tough for a business that is dependent on the weather and other factors, but do you have another solution for the decrease, or lack of an increase, in funding needed to keep things going? Simply complaining without offering viable solutions will not solve anything. If a guide raises their rates, should I just refuse to pay it, at least not without a fight?

[Capt. Troy]

Not worked up at all as it does not affect me. I just feel that all users should be subjected to the same % increase. You gonna tell me that all this infrastructure in the park is solely for the guides. Camp sites, trails porta potties and so on. Most of the guides fishing those waters never touch one piece of dirt in ENP or use any of their facilities. Heck, they don't even have any means to collect the fees from an entry point on the west side.

40 buck to 50 bucks for the public. 250 bucks to 1000 bucks for guides.

300% of 50 bucks for all other users is not the same for those that were already paying a much larger % to start with

 

If they truly need the money the private users represent a much higher usage rates than the guides. The math does not add up to common sense.

 

It sounds too much like a money grab from small business. They know the guides will pay because they have to stay in business. Joe blow may just say I will go somewhere else.

[hurricane]

I totally disagree with the fees already being to low. This is a national park fees should be low to allow access for all people. These parks are one of few parks that can only be accessed by the service provided by guides or by owning your own boat. The cost of this transportation is already high, add to that the fees, and that means less people will get to experience these parks. 

I wonder if other National Parks have similar fees on the guides that work in the parks? Im sure there are backpack guides and snowmobile guides in the northern parks and why does this not address Biscayne National park? Im not trying to add more fees to guides, just wondering how something like this is not an across the board park regulation. If it was there would be a huge group of people to voice the discontent over these fees. 

 

[conocean]

All good points here....

If you look thru the nps.gov site you will find that all the Fed Parks have fees for recreational entry, camping and/or boating, etc as well as commercial usage fees. Some fees are more, some fees are less than current ENP fees. The proposed increase in commercial ENP fees is a shocker but will the Feds enhance & further protect the resource with the funds collected as they claim will happen? History tells us that the answer is no. 

After doing research & thinking about the bigger picture for the past few days I must recognize that the ENP is an International Biosphere Reserve, World Heritage Site, and a Wetland of International Importance.....one of only 3 areas on earth you will find on those lists. Most scientists believe the ENP is the 2nd most important biosphere on earth. None of our other Fed Parks come close to being regarded with such relative importance to earth. So as Americans we all have "skin in this game" of protecting the ENP. 

As we all move forward in contributing to the demise of earth's resources, there must be a higher price to pay for access to such a profound area such as the ENP and perhaps we should've all been paying high access fees all along. But I'm only in agreement with the proposed fees if we can see improvement to enhance everyone's experience in the ENP; commercial & recreational users alike. There has been no distinct promise of such, only recognition of what should be done & what the Feds would like to do. The ENP has always deserved proper protection including properly marked trails & waterways and public education on how sensitive the area is & how to treat the environment. And the American people deserve access to the ENP so we can enjoy such an amazing place. The price we should all pay for that access is the hot topic of this discussion. 

The Calusa Indians were the first ones that truly understood how important the Everglades is to this earth. Yet none of them were scientists nor did any of them know anything other than life in the ENP. Somehow they knew! But the Feds decided to hunt & kill them all then directed the Army Corps of Engineers to "dry out" the Everglades. Now the Feds make the public pay for those enormous mistakes to help protect & preserve what's left of it when that should've been done all along. Talk about going backwards!! 

What eats me up the most is that the Feds can hold us all accountable to pay increased fees in the ENP but we cannot hold them accountable for doing anymore than what they're doing now, which is the bare minimum at best. 

[Coto]

I will take a liberal progressive term on this "Resist" ...I will not give them another dime. It's north of Tiger Key for me, there is still plenty left of ten thousand islands up North. 

[NCTribute]

Conocean makes valid points. The issue with not using the fees effectively is a separate issue from what the fees should be. In other words, with very low funds the effectiveness will likely never happen, but with adequate funding at least there is potential to become effective at managing the resource. So saying that the current management is not effective is not a valid argument for not increasing the fees. Saying that the expectation of the increased fees is better management is valid.

To me being proactive is key, we cannot continue to let things become a crisis before taking action.

[mustang190]

Up here at st. Marks it's still a $5 entry fee. And as far as I know guides pay the same. But that's only if you use the ramp in the park. 

[Tarpon Terry]

I'm fishing out of Tarpon Springs now, but if I were still guiding out of Key Largo, this would be the impact on my anglers.

For the year 2020, the additional CUA Fee per fishing party would be 5% times $700 = $35.  (Eight Hour Day)

The Park Entry Fee would probably be $25.  ENP has not yet decided, but the fee for an automobile is currently $25.

So, the total increase in fees for the ENP fishing trip would total $35 + $25 = $60.

The trip will now cost $760.  Might as well round it off to $800.

If I were a tourist, I'd go diving instead.